Jacobs v. Secretary of Health and Human Services

In the United States Court of Federal Claims OFFICE OF SPECIAL MASTERS No. 21-957V ************************* * ISAIAH JACOBS, * Chief Special Master Corcoran * Petitioner, * Filed: December 5, 2023 * v. * * SECRETARY OF HEALTH * AND HUMAN SERVICES, * * Respondent. * * ************************* Maximillian J. Muller, Muller Brazil, LLP, Drescher, PA, for Petitioner.

Joseph A. Lewis, U.S. Dep’t of Justice, Washington, DC, for Respondent.

DECISION AWARDING DAMAGES 1 On February 19, 2021, Isaiah Jacobs filed a petition seeking compensation under the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program (the “Vaccine Program”). 2 Petitioner alleges that he suffered from optic neuritis and/or myelin oligodendrocyte glycoprotein antibody disease (“MOGAD”) that were caused-in-fact by either the tetanus, diphtheria, and pertussis (“Tdap”) or influenza (“flu”) vaccines he received on September 18, 2019. Moreover, Petitioner alleges that he experienced residual effects of these conditions for more than six months.

Respondent denies that the Tdap or flu vaccines caused Petitioner to suffer optic neuritis and/or MOGAD, or any other injury or condition. Respondent also denies that Petitioner’s current condition is a sequela of a vaccine-related injury. Nonetheless both parties, while maintaining their Under Vaccine Rule 18(b), each party has fourteen (14) days within which to request redaction “of any information furnished by that party: (1) that is a trade secret or commercial or financial in substance and is privileged or confidential; or (2) that includes medical files or similar files, the disclosure of which would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of privacy.” Vaccine Rule 18(b). Otherwise, the whole Decision will be available to the public in its present form. Id. The Vaccine Program comprises Part 2 of the National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act of 1986, Pub. L. No. 99-660, 100 Stat. 3758, codified as amended at 42 U.S.C. §§ 300aa-10 through 34 (2012) (“Vaccine Act” or “the Act”).

Individual section references hereafter will be to § 300aa of the Act (but will omit that statutory prefix). above-stated positions, agreed in a stipulation (filed on December 5, 2023) that the issues before them could be settled, and that a decision should be entered awarding Petitioner compensation.

I have reviewed the file, and based upon that review, I conclude that the parties’ stipulation (as attached hereto) is reasonable. I therefore adopt it as my decision in awarding damages on the terms set forth therein.

The stipulation awards: • A lump sum of $90,000.00 in the form of a check payable to Petitioner.

Stipulation ¶ 8. This amount represents compensation for all damages that would be available under Section 15(a) of the Act.

I approve a Vaccine Program award in the requested amount set forth above to be made to Petitioner. In the absence of a motion for review filed pursuant to RCFC Appendix B, the clerk of the Court is directed to enter judgment herewith. 3

IT IS SO ORDERED.

/s/ Brian H. Corcoran Brian H. Corcoran Chief Special Master

Pursuant to Vaccine Rule 11(a), the parties may expedite entry of judgment by each filing (either jointly or separately) a notice renouncing their right to seek review.